-
It’s Not Just the IRS
May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing
May 17, 2013 | 9 comments
-
UPDATED: Deputy AG Being Set Up to Take the Fall
May 15, 2013 | 15 comments
-
IRS Tried to Stymie the Growth of the Tea Party
May 15, 2013 | 4 comments
-
The IRS Scandal Explodes
May 14, 2013 | 7 comments
The Spectacle Blog
The Heritage Foundation hosted a panel of Tea Party House Republicans yesterday. The congressmen were asked to respond to Sen. Rand Paul’s recent endorsement of immigration reform. Their answers, courtesy of TPM, might surprise you:
“We’re not going to round up millions and millions of people, kids and grandmas and grandpas and send them to wherever,” Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL) said, adding there were both “conservative arguments” and “emotional arguments” that should compel the House to address immigration.
In addition to Duncan and Radel, the group included Reps. Raul Labrador (R-ID), Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Dave Schweikert (R-AZ), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Steve Scalise (R-LA), and Mick Mulvaney (R-SC).
After several members expressed their support for some version of reform, they were asked as a group whether any one of them disagreed with Paul’s call to legalize the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country. The group looked to each other and shook their heads. Not one raised an objection — at most they said they wanted more details. (Emphasis added.)
There are three possibilities here.
First, certain conservatives are so mesmerized by Rand Paul that
they’re willing to cast off principles in order to avoid
criticizing him. Second, this is a political calculation, meaning
even the hardiest Republicans have fallen for the canard that the
GOP can appeal to Hispanic voters through immigration reform. Or
third, some conservatives are beginning to seriously reevaluate
their positions on immigration issues.
I think door number three is the most likely. The congressmen listed aren’t the type to be swayed by political winds or a fellow politician. But if this is a genuine policy shift, then Republicans must proceed with caution. We have a drug war raging south of our border and an indebted government that can’t afford further entitlement or welfare costs. Immigration reform of some sort may be necessary, but it absolutely cannot exacerbate either of those problems.
View all comments (18) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Matt Purple
http://spectator.org/blog/2013/03/21/tea-party-leaning-towards-immi
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Al Adab| 3.21.13 @ 12:02PM
We err when focusing on "a path to citizenship" in this debate. From my experience, that is not a matter of interest to the illegal migrant job seekers. What they wish is simply the ability to work legally in the states. Their children, born here, become citizens at birth. They simply are not interested in getting in line for citizenship when the benefits of citizenship are available to non-citizens as well. What is the incentive? Once they become legal workers nothing else is of significance. This path to citizenship, which so many once proudly sought, is simply not something in which they are interested.
Yes, the comments are a generalization but consider, what is the difference between a citizen and a legal alien?
CJW| 3.21.13 @ 1:43PM
Al Adab
Rand Paul and the Tea Party House Republicans are supposed to be the conservative wing of the Republican party. If they , and Marco Rubio, support some version of amnesty or whatever is the name then there will be some form of amnesty for those already here. The only issue left will be whether the border gets secured.
C. Vernon Crisler | 3.21.13 @ 5:27PM
Under the Constitution, children of illegals are NOT automatically citizens of the U.S.
The best answer to the immigration problem: send all the law-breakers home and make them get in line like everyone else.
As Yoda said: Either do or do not: there is no try.
Quartermaster| 3.22.13 @ 12:38PM
There is no will to enforce the law on immigrants. The Dims want the votes they will yield, legal or not. The Chamber of Commerec types want the wage slaves.
the answer is to enforce the law, and that is something that has not been tried. All they have to do is make employers verify legal status, which is quite easy, and jail them if they don't. Cut off the jobs and the illegal aliens will go home on their own.
This issue is about rule of law. Frankly, that's something that started to end in 1865 until we don't have it except to the degree it gets lip service, or you don't have a bunch of money to buy political favor.
Mike W| 3.21.13 @ 12:22PM
Goodbye to the Republicans. They will so outrage the base that they will stay home in 2014. After that, the demographic shift will be so big that Republicans, as they are now, will be un-electable. They will have to shift left, including abandoning Israel, raising taxes, etc. , to compete with a Democrat party left un-checked.
That scenario could not be clearer. Demography is destiny.
Bob K| 3.21.13 @ 6:41PM
There will be a 3rd party after that happens and that will be a good thing. Some Democrat voters will be attracted to it and things will be worked out over the next few elections. The old parties will have to play coalition politics to maintain control of Congress.
Tanguera| 3.21.13 @ 12:26PM
The Democrats will just run farther to the Left, so that it can -- with the assist of the MSM -- still paint Republicans as out of touch, intolerant, etc. Isn't this, well, rather probable?
It therefore, IMHO, makes no common sense for the Republicans to so "modernize" since the base will abandon them in droves -- meaning that they will have a harder time winning elections. Add to that that the Democrats will be highly organized in getting these new Pathers to register as Democrats, etc.
What is up, therefore, with the GOP Establishment? Seat at the table of the new world order?
Bob K| 3.21.13 @ 6:43PM
"The "base" will coalesce in another party which will attract some Democrats who will feel at home there.
Derek Leaberry| 3.21.13 @ 12:58PM
If these wimps cave, I'm out forever as a Republican.
JD| 3.21.13 @ 2:53PM
When a teenage girl gets pregnant, she has choices to make, and none of them are good.
1. She can slaughter her baby, which is a great wrong and which she may regret for the rest of her life.
2. She can put her baby up for adoption, suffering the indignity of teenage pregnancy and the long-term regret.
3. She can keep her baby, suffering the indignity of teenage pregnancy and the long-term costs of raising the baby, including lost education. Her economic outcomes for the rest of her life are substantially impacted.
One of these choices is best. But all of them are also painful and open to criticism.
So too the "immigration" situation. Social welfare is an evil that has manifested, and there are no painless ways to remove it. The presence of illegals has similarly manifested.
We must shut the barn door first. Once that's done, we may find it cheaper to deal with what has already passed through it than to try to undo it. This does not necessarily compromise ideology.
lsudolemite| 3.21.13 @ 5:06PM
We know that Democrats play bait-and-switch on spending cuts that never occur in exchange for tax hikes now. What possible reason do we have to believe that they wouldn't do likewise with "comprehensive" immigration reform?
7-08| 3.21.13 @ 4:05PM
Or maybe they are tired of being the hate filled bigots that want to dump thirteen year old girls from the local Junior High on the streets of Juarez.
Quartermaster| 3.22.13 @ 12:41PM
As if. The fault of those "13 year old girls dumped on the streets of Juarez" is the fault of the parents, not the so called H8trs you love so well that dwell between your ears.
C Bowen | 3.21.13 @ 5:27PM
The test will be if they vote against the final bill for Amnesty--it is political suicide for the Tea Party sorts.
btims86| 3.21.13 @ 5:31PM
What does "immigration rreform" really mean? Forgiveness of serial law breaking and and increase in legal immigration, even with our high unemployment and lousy economy (outside of the Beltway)?
Deporation is the onlly true form of immigration reform because we haven't tried it in decades.
Connection Not Compromise| 3.22.13 @ 1:49AM
Matt,
We know why Liberals love illegal immigrants-- new Democrat voters.
The question then for Conservatives is, "Why are illegal immigrants coming over the border (escaping the drug war notwithstanding)?" In other words, what is the root cause of illegal immigration? Is it because Mexican immigrants want to come to a new land of opportunity? Is it because they are lured by low wage jobs that are viable because they can exploit our welfare safety net? Or is it perhaps a combination of both?
If the main impetus behind illegal immigration is the desire for a free lunch and if the result of that is further entitlement and welfare costs, then let's get rid of the root problem-- entitlements and welfare.
It appears to me that immigration is an ugly symptom of a much larger problem-- our government's gravy train.
Get rid of entitlements and welfare, and we might solve several problems-- we'll eliminate one of the main incentives for illegals to cross the border, we'll rein in one of the biggest accelerators of the federal debt clock, and we'll significantly decrease the size and scope of the Federal government.
Maybe its time for Conservatives to play offense instead of defense.
C Bowen | 3.22.13 @ 6:23PM
Big Corporations, who underwrite both parties, want the cheap labor. That is the problem.
Ryan| 3.22.13 @ 8:24AM
1. Secure the border.
2. Increase work permits and streamline and legalize the process to allow workers to come over (WHY we are not pushing this as the major point is beyond me).
3. Eliminate social welfare for non-citizens.
4. Deport any who commit crimes - even traffic violations. If you get locked up, you get sent home.
No "path to citizenship" necessary.